Starship landing

[pjbierma]

Can someone please explain to me how it is possible to ensure that Starship can land on the moon without tipping over. It seems to have a high center of gravity and it seems impossible to ensure that it will land on a completely smooth level spot.

 

[billslugg]

For landing on distant bodies where there is no prepared level spot and no tower to catch it, the rocket will have adjustable legs.

 

[pjbierma]

Is this something that you "think" or something that you actually "know" about the Starship design?
I have not seen this feature in any of the design plans for Starship.
It doesn't seem like that feature can just be "added on." How in the world can they plan for a landing in 2026?

Even with landing legs, it will not be landing on a level flat prepared landing pad. The overall design seems susceptible to tipping over. It is not hard for me to imagine one of the legs landing in a small crater or depression or on a large rock.

There has to be more about this somewhere.

Thanks

 

[Classical Motion]

Landing those returning boosters on an ocean barge gives you an idea of how this is done. This landing is on a tilting plane, and done with software sensing and control.

The landing on a rough surface has 2 tilting planes of surface, perhaps even 3 planes depending on the number of landing legs, and can be done with this software method.

Fast sensing and controlling multiple inputs and outputs with software allows these dynamics.

Sensing motion with vicinity, and reacting quickly to it. A soft crash.

 

[pjbierma]

Landing those returning boosters on an ocean barge gives you an idea of how this is done. This landing is on a tilting plane, and done with software sensing and control.

The landing on a rough surface has 2 tilting planes of surface, perhaps even 3 planes depending on the number of landing legs, and can be done with this software method.

Fast sensing and controlling multiple inputs and outputs with software allows these dynamics.

Sensing motion with vicinity, and reacting quickly to it. A soft crash.

 

[pjbierma]

That is very interesting and makes sense.
I always assumed that the landing legs on the Falcon are "passive."
Are you saying that the Falcon landing legs actively adjust to the motion of the barge when Falcon lands at sea?
I was not aware of that.

In any case, landing on a flat prepared pad seems a lot different than landing on the lunar (or Martian) surface.

Furthermore, I will repeat my question: Where are designs for landing legs on the Starship?

 

[LKK]

Can someone please explain to me how it is possible to ensure that Starship can land on the moon without tipping over. It seems to have a high center of gravity and it seems impossible to ensure that it will land on a completely smooth level spot.

I def understand the question, this was my first thought on hearing starship plan, I guess I have to believe that NASA has an understanding of and confidence in how this can be done.

 

[pjbierma]

I def understand the question, this was my first thought on hearing starship plan, I guess I have to believe that NASA has an understanding of and confidence in how this can be done.

Thanks LKK. I wish I had your confidence.

 

[Classical Motion]

I have no idea of the craft's landing gear. I just spitball from what I have read and worked with a little. Even if the craft's legs are dumb, my comment still applies. There are many other methods for keeping an alignment. That is directing and responding to an angled force.

If I spent a lot of money for a lot of experts for years.........to succeed.......I don't think I would give all the details away. As we see and know, the dynamic is not perfected yet. There are still many patents to be filed and the money that goes with them. For the ultimate dependable success.

But there is certainly no physical mystery about it. They get better at it everyday. The failures is what tells and teaches the most. We were able to pogo off a small rock, it wasn't perfect and elegant, but it worked. The next one should be better.

Starship landings will get better too. I'll bet they tune up that software after every landing. It might be part of their PM protocols.

But I have no direct knowledge of these things.

 

[pjbierma]

I have no idea of the craft's landing gear. I just spitball from what I have read and worked with a little. Even if the craft's legs are dumb, my comment still applies. There are many other methods for keeping an alignment. That is directing and responding to an angled force.

If I spent a lot of money for a lot of experts for years.........to succeed.......I don't think I would give all the details away. As we see and know, the dynamic is not perfected yet. There are still many patents to be filed and the money that goes with them. For the ultimate dependable success.

But there is certainly no physical mystery about it. They get better at it everyday. The failures is what tells and teaches the most. We were able to pogo off a small rock, it wasn't perfect and elegant, but it worked. The next one should be better.

Starship landings will get better too. I'll bet they tune up that software after every landing. It might be part of their PM protocols.

But I have no direct knowledge of these things.

Thanks again.
I agree that people a lot smarter than me have thought of this.
Nevertheless, I'm not worried about the ability to land vertically.
I too, am just "spitballing" looking at the height of Starship and the diameter of the base. It looks very susceptible to tipping and does not look very robust with respect to landing on an uneven surface. It is my understanding that the Apollo LM could stand at a 40 degree tilt with an empty descent stage and could take off at a 15 degree tilt. I have not seen anything to indicate that landing legs are in the design and my questions remain.

If landing legs are being considered, it is hard for me to see how there will be a manned lunar landing before 2030. If there are no legs being considered, all of my questions regarding the ability to accomplish a landing remain.

 

[billslugg]

Is this something that you "think" or something that you actually "know" about the Starship design?
I have not seen this feature in any of the design plans for Starship.
It doesn't seem like that feature can just be "added on." How in the world can they plan for a landing in 2026?

Even with landing legs, it will not be landing on a level flat prepared landing pad. The overall design seems susceptible to tipping over. It is not hard for me to imagine one of the legs landing in a small crater or depression or on a large rock.

There has to be more about this somewhere.

Thanks

I Googled "does starship have adjustable legs" and read all about it here.

Will SpaceX’s Starship Have Landing Legs? – TheSpaceBucket

thespacebucket.com

If I was just guessing, I would have made that clear.

 

[pjbierma]

I Googled "does starship have adjustable legs" and read all about it here.

Will SpaceX’s Starship Have Landing Legs? – TheSpaceBucket

thespacebucket.com

If I was just guessing, I would have made that clear.

OK. I'll be looking for those legs when Artemis III lands in 2026 (and I assume unmanned tests prior to this).

 

[ColinRyan]

I'm reading this thread with interest, and I have a related question. I apologize if it seems silly, but I think it's a valid query and it is the kind of thing I would expect to see in a list of FAQs.

If Starship is the Official Lander(TM) of the Artemis program, why is NASA even bothering with Orion and the Lunar Gateway? I mean, Starship is designed to eventually reach Mars from LEO. It's absolutely humongous, it can easily carry everything needed for a one-month stay. Even SpaceX is aiming at going to the Moon, but without landing (dearMoon project).

Again, sorry if I missed some basic memo about this - I do follow the space news - and any explanation will be greatly appreciated.

 

[pjbierma]

I'm reading this thread with interest, and I have a related question. I apologize if it seems silly, but I think it's a valid query and it is the kind of thing I would expect to see in a list of FAQs.

If Starship is the Official Lander(TM) of the Artemis program, why is NASA even bothering with Orion and the Lunar Gateway? I mean, Starship is designed to eventually reach Mars from LEO. It's absolutely humongous, it can easily carry everything needed for a one-month stay. Even SpaceX is aiming at going to the Moon, but without landing (dearMoon project).

Again, sorry if I missed some basic memo about this - I do follow the space news - and any explanation will be greatly appreciated.

The whole program is a mess in my opinion.

Former NASA admin wants to throw out Artemis and start over — here's why

A former NASA administrator says that Artemis needs a reboot and that NASA needs to cut all of the commercial components.

bgr.com

 

[ilovespace2024]

Can someone please explain to me how it is possible to ensure that Starship can land on the moon without tipping over. It seems to have a high center of gravity and it seems impossible to ensure that it will land on a completely smooth level spot.

well there are things to help it stand so it does not go off into the Space